• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged So there was melted steel

What are shrinky dinks?

It is obvious that this is heat-generated. Do you have photos of non-WTC crushed steel columns that show the same smooth piling?

You were never a kid? Google it.

Those are crushed and folded. Get over it.
 
Telling too when you look where those pics are posted and in what context. Conspiracy sites. More people who have no clue what they're looking at. Shocking! lol
I have to giggle when I see remnants of paint on supposedly "melted" steel.

It's like the "meteorite" with the readable paper hanging out of it. . :rolleyes:
 
you have still yet to explain what the relevance of melted metal has to do with the PROVED and VERIFIED fact that the two buildings were bought down because of terrorists flying planes into them.
 
The only evidence of steel "melting" were corrosive attacks which have nothing to do with melting by heat. Maybe some thin walled steel melted (like thin gauge computer cases) but not enough to create "rivers" of molten steel. If there was rivers they would have been pulling solidified globs out of the pile that were several tons.

I even got Christophera (spelling?) to agree that a source of molten metals could have been aluminum when I showed him just how much you could expect to find in cars and trucks in the parking garage/loading docks underground when the towers fell (several hundred pounds to a few tons each).
 
Do you have some evidence that crushed steel forms liquid-like piles rather than sharp bends or fractures? You must, since you seem so sure of yourself.

It's called 20 years of practical experience working with large heavy steel machinery. I've seen the same thing hundreds of times. No heat needed. That experience also includes heating and forming steel. That isn't the result of heat. From what I can tell, you have zero experience.
 
I have to giggle when I see remnants of paint on supposedly "melted" steel.

It's like the "meteorite" with the readable paper hanging out of it. . :rolleyes:

Lol I know. it's almost sad. What Ergo doesn't realize is that if he had something resembling actual evidence (rather than mislabeled pictures) most would jump on his side here.
 
The evidence we have that it was not a CD are the eye witness accounts of planes getting flown into buildings thousands of eye witness accounts, video and electronic , radar, confirmation.

And nothing at all whatsoever to back up this fantasy about a controlled demolition.
 
It's called 20 years of practical experience working with large heavy steel machinery. I've seen the same thing hundreds of times. No heat needed. That experience also includes heating and forming steel. That isn't the result of heat. From what I can tell, you have zero experience.
I want to see what he considers "liquid-like piles".

I saw nothing even coming close to this. :boggled:
 
It's called 20 years of practical experience working with large heavy steel machinery. I've seen the same thing hundreds of times. No heat needed. That experience also includes heating and forming steel. That isn't the result of heat.

I didn't ask you for your opinion about heavy steel machinery. I asked if you have any evidence of crushed structural steel that forms liquid-like piles rather than sharp bends or fractures.
 
and please again explain what relevance this has to the verified and proved fact that two planes were flown into those buildings?

Buildings I hasten to add had a lot of metal in them of various types.
 
I want to see what he considers "liquid-like piles".

I saw nothing even coming close to this. :boggled:

Indeed.
Ergo doesn't realize he's actually looking at why Tony's "column energy absorption" is so mind numbingly wrong.
 
Indeed.
Ergo doesn't realize he's actually looking at why Tony's "column energy absorption" is so mind numbingly wrong.

Lol.

If it wasn't thread drift, I would LOVE you to explain this one! :D

But here I'd rather you pony up your evidence about what crushed structural steel looks like.
 
Where is your evidence that melted metal at the site whether it existed or not has any relevance to the fact that terrorists destroyed those buildings and killed 3,000 people by flying airliners into them, this fact has been verified and confirmed, the truther fantasy has been shown to be utterly bogus time and time and time again.
 
I didn't ask you for your opinion about heavy steel machinery. I asked if you have any evidence of crushed structural steel that forms liquid-like piles rather than sharp bends or fractures.

Steel machines are structures made of steel :rolleyes:, pound for pound a lot stronger than buildings too (as an assembly).
To get a sharp bend in metal it has to be formed, IE bent around something sharp. You get tears from work wear. As in when you bend it too fast the steel heats internally and becomes brittle in that spot. That's what causes steel springs to fail and break (as a familiar example). When you crush steel, generally it looks like the pics you posted.

Take a piece of hobby wire and bend it back and forth till it snaps. It will be super hot. Can even burn you.
 
But here I'd rather you pony up your evidence about what crushed structural steel looks like.
You posted the pictures already. :p

(this is where you prove your claim instead of your usual asking someone to prove your claim wrong).
 
Last edited:
Lol.

If it wasn't thread drift, I would LOVE you to explain this one! :D

But here I'd rather you pony up your evidence about what crushed structural steel looks like.

Simply, once it's crushed it can't absorb energy and it won't help halt a collapse.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom